Please Help evaluate my application

Stage 1
1

Hello, I’m preparing a Global Talent – Exceptional Talent (Digital Tech) application and would really value a quick sanity check on my M1 / OC2 / OC3 / LOR structure.

Document Structure (10 total):

Letters of Recommendation (3 docs):
For context. I worked with a UK based start up accelerator. Via this start up Accelerator I worked with two start ups.

  • Previous employer reference letter (Founder of one of the start ups)
  • CTO of the UK based Startup accelerator program reference letter
  • Founder of a fintech platform reference letter (I never worked with the fintech but on a side project with the founder. So they know my work)

Mandatory 1 – Leading talent recognition (3 docs):
Context: I worked with an African payment company

  • African payments company - CTO reference letter ( explaining how my SDK work drove 17% revenue increase, 20+ increase in merchant onboarding)

  • African payments company - Technical proof documentation (Including news clipping of how the fintech is improving payment across Africa)

  • Industry expert judging role in cloud computing - Awards documentation (13-year established program) - Evidences here include screenshot of Email, Letter of acknowledgement detailing I was selected based on qualifications, accomplishments, and contributions to the field, link and screenshot to my judge profile and certificate

Optional Criteria 2 – Work outside occupation (2 docs):

  • Speaking engagement + Published articles
    • A fintech event panel (100+ attendees, independent participation, main stage) (I spoke on Fraud detection.) - Evidence include pictures on main stage and a link to video of me speaking.
    • Expert commentary in major publication on AI/mobile development challenges
  • Open source contributions (6.98k downloads Flutter package, CLI tools)

Optional Criteria 3 – Significant technical contribution (2 docs):

  • Cross-border remittance platform - CTO reference letter ( explaining how I wrote 80% codebase which led to zero to top-50 ranking)
  • Cross-border remittance platform - Technical proof which also includes news to the top-50 ranking
2 Likes
2

@pahuja @Francisca_Chiedu @Francisca_Chiedu @Raphael @Akash_Joshi @May

3

Hi @Joseph_Ajayi you have a few good elements out there, some pointers to help you refine:

  1. MC1 & 2 is part of the same evidence story unless the news mentions you. You can combine them into one evidence document representing your work, news clipping and the letter validating your impact and also validating the news coverage can be attributed to your contribution. This criteria is about industry recognition hence showing only internal metrics is insufficient and more suited for OC3. The letter should talk about how this metric improvement led to industry edge for the company and strongly attribute it to your contribution.
  2. MC3: did you do expert judging for 13 years or is this a one-time judging? If you have done it a couple of times it’s stronger than showing just once.
  3. OC2.1: does the video have significant likes and comments? If not, I would skip it. Instead include the invite or thank you letter or an event organizer letter specifically validating the scale and importance of the event in tech along with attendee size confirmation.
  4. OC3.1&2: look like the same evidence story that can be combined in one. Would you have one more story from your workex to show in this criteria?
1 Like
4

Hi @pahuja.
Thanks for your response.
I maybe did not outline them clear enough.
MC1 & 2 are indeed the same thing. They are combined into one. The letter does validate that the news converage is attributed to my contribution. Both of them actually represent the criteria that says -

You led the growth of a product-led digital technology company, product or team inside a digital technology company, as evidenced by reference letter(s) from leading industry expert(s) describing your work, or as evidenced by news clippings, lines of code from public repos or similar evidence.

The judging platform is a one of thing. They 13 years I mentioned is that the judging body has existed for 13 years. I have evidence of judging on two occasions with them. One earlier this year and one recently. One for Cloud computing and the other for innovative business ideas.
This is supposed to be for

You have held or hold a significant expert role participating on panels, or individually, assessing the work of others in the same field or a field of specialisation related to the digital technology sector.

For OC2. The video is something I uploaded on google drive as proof, however based on your comment I can take it out, I have evidence of emails, pictures of me speaking, linkedin post by the organiser, my speaker tag,

For OC3. You are right, There are actually one, It is the only story I have that seem to fit the OC3 well as my impact was leading the organisation to being ranked to-50 fintech product. I added a screenshot of the news , my PRs, and code contribution and the letter from the CTO

I listed them the way I did so that you can see how my 10 documents are arranged.

Thanks again

@pahuja

Also regarding the OC3. I may be able to get one more story from my workex, the only issue is I already have 10 documents. the Refence letter for M1 and Refrence letter for OC3 already takes 2 out of the 10.

Is there any strategy I can deploy?

1 Like
5

Got it! Google Drive links are not accepted by TN so please avoid them.

6

Thanks @pahuja

I have a question.

Also regarding the OC3. I may be able to get one more story from my workex, the only issue is I already have 10 documents. the Refence letter for M1 and Refrence letter for OC3 already takes 2 out of the 10.

Is there any strategy I can deploy?

Am I good to go?

7

Yes you can combine existing two OC3 into one since it’s the same story.

8

Thanks.

Can I reinterate a question. Apologies if it sounds stupid I just need to be sure.

You mentioned if I can get one more story for OC3 from my work experience.

Based on the fact that I already have 10 documents is there any other thing I can do?

9

If you combine your existing 2 oc3 into one document then you will have space for another document to form 10.

10

Not sure, How I can combine the reference letter from the CTO and the document that shows the screenshot of my contribution. Should I add the letter as a picture on the document as well?

11

@Joseph_Ajayi

Based on the fact that I already have 10 documents is there any other thing I can do?

The recommendation letters are not part of the 10 evidence you need. You have only listed 7.

12

Wow. Thanks @Raphael . I always thought they were part of the 10.

I’ll add to this and update.
@pahuja @pahuja . Thanks so much.

13

Wow. Thanks @Raphael . I always thought they were part of the 10.

@Joseph_Ajayi Will it be okay, if I suggest you read the Tech Nation guidance before updating your application set. Tech Nation Guidance

1 Like
14

@Raphael @pahuja Big thanks.

In addition to OC3.

I have now added

  • A fintech that I led the front end team that digitalized an old african savings strategy
    (As at the last screenshot I have which is 2024 - The app had proceessed over 1million pounds in savings)

  • In addition to this , I have refrence letter from the Co founder

cc @Raphael @pahuja @Francisca_Chiedu @Akash_Joshi

15

Your application can be strengthened with some adjustments. First, for your MC1 evidence combining the payments company work and news coverage, make sure the reference letter explicitly ties your SDK contribution to the industry recognition the company received. I’ve seen applications where internal metrics alone weren’t enough - the letter needs to show how your 17% revenue increase gave the company an industry edge that led to the external news coverage.

For the judging role, having two instances with the same organization strengthens your case significantly. Just ensure your evidence clearly explains the selection process and why you were chosen based on your digital technology expertise. The 13-year history of the program adds credibility, so highlight that prominently. For your OC2 speaking engagement, skip the Google Drive video entirely - assessors can’t access external links anyway. Focus on the invitation email, organizer letter confirming the event scale and your selection criteria, photos from the stage, and LinkedIn posts by organizers as your proof package.

Your OC3 setup looks promising with the two fintech stories. Since you now understand LORs don’t count toward your 10 evidence documents, you have room to add that additional savings app story you mentioned. Combine each story’s reference letter with technical proof (screenshots, PRs, news coverage) into single comprehensive documents. This gives you space for 2-3 strong OC3 evidences showing consistent pattern of technical leadership driving measurable business outcomes. You’re on the right track - just focus on making each evidence self-contained and backed by both third-party validation and clear attribution of outcomes to your individual contributions.

1 Like
16

Hi @Akash_Joshi . Thanks for this feedback. I submitted a day ago. The only think I think I may have missed is the letter confirming the event scale. Fingers crossed though.

Thanks @pahuja @Raphael . I will definitely keep you updated.

Fingers crossed.